This dac looks promising if it is better than the D100 which I thought was a pretty good dac. I'm looking forward to some more impressions of these. I have toyed around with another dac and I only use usb so this is right at the top of the list for me.

I'll do a lot more comparisons as the D100 is my "benchmark" in the price range. Maybe later I can send the Concero to you for a while, once I've got a review posted.

I'm listening to it again right now, this time fed by a basic laptop. Tron soundtrack by Daft Punk sounding quite nice - really deep bass capabilities, and nice ambiance created by the clear and accurate imaging. I think I like the 2nd filter choice best, forget what it is called. But the two filters are very similar sounding.

I'll do a lot more comparisons as the D100 is my "benchmark" in the price range. Maybe later I can send the Concero to you for a while, once I've got a review posted.

I'm listening to it again right now, this time fed by a basic laptop. Tron soundtrack by Daft Punk sounding quite nice - really deep bass capabilities, and nice ambiance created by the clear and accurate imaging. I think I like the 2nd filter choice best, forget what it is called. But the two filters are very similar sounding.

I'll do a lot more comparisons as the D100 is my "benchmark" in the price range. Maybe later I can send the Concero to you for a while, once I've got a review posted.

I'm listening to it again right now, this time fed by a basic laptop. Tron soundtrack by Daft Punk sounding quite nice - really deep bass capabilities, and nice ambiance created by the clear and accurate imaging. I think I like the 2nd filter choice best, forget what it is called. But the two filters are very similar sounding.

I'm looking forward to your impressions with some better dacs when you get the chance. I appreciate the offer however you may never get it back

Yep, that's the second option that comes up as you cycle through. Off is default, push the button once to get IIR, apodizing comes with the next button press.

Interesting. The Resonessence website says that most of their test listeners prefer the apodizing filter, but so far I am leaning ever-so-slightly to the IIR filter, I think because the elimination of pre-ringing makes the transient response a little cleaner. But as you noted, it's a close call.

Do you still have your Violectric V200? I'd be interested in how it pairs with the Concero. Superficial Me is bugged by the aesthetics of the teeny-weeny Concero next to the big hulking Bryston, so if there is a smaller, blacker amp that sounds good with the Concero I would be tempted.

When I was doing the recent amp comparison, I compiled a playlist of some of my favorite solo piano tracks, and I listened to that yesterday.

Shockingly good.

On the fourth movement of the Beethoven "Hammerklavier" sonata, Paul Lewis lets his inner McCoy Tyner come out to play; he keeps the damper pedal down and lets the left hand rip. Even on the Ayre, there was a tendency for things to get messy as new notes get piled on top of earlier notes that haven't fully decayed. The Concero handles this difficult challenge with relative ease. I'm not saying I could transcribe it by ear, but I can follow everything that's happening.

Speaking of McCoy Tyner, "Naima" from Solo sounds just great on the Concero.

One of my favorite 20th Century works for solo piano is Gulda's "Play Piano Play," which draws deeply on his jazz experience. Marc-Andre Hamelin's recording of this piece, on his "In a State of Jazz" album, emphasizes the the contrapuntal nature of the interaction between the left and right hands, and the Concero lets you all the way in. The grace notes that Gulda used to imitate the little glissandos that guitar and horn players often use to "slide into" a note are rendered perfectly.

And last but not least, there's Monk. The solo version of "Blue Monk," from "Thelonious Alone in San Francisco," just sounds spectacular. The album was recorded in a large, reverberant space, and you can hear every bit of the room ambience, the huge air around each note and the long decay. Just, wow.

Interesting. The Resonessence website says that most of their test listeners prefer the apodizing filter, but so far I am leaning ever-so-slightly to the IIR filter, I think because the elimination of pre-ringing makes the transient response a little cleaner. But as you noted, it's a close call.

Do you still have your Violectric V200? I'd be interested in how it pairs with the Concero. Superficial Me is bugged by the aesthetics of the teeny-weeny Concero next to the big hulking Bryston, so if there is a smaller, blacker amp that sounds good with the Concero I would be tempted.

Yep, very close. I'd like to think I can tell them apart but in a blind test it would be tricky. Still, nice to have options.

I do have the V200 and it will be used with the Concero when I get time. So far I've been working on some tube goodness - Icon Audio HP8 mkII, Opera Consonance M-10S, and my reference amp, the Analog Design Labs Svetlana 2. But I'll switch out of valve mode soon and go for the V200 and Yulong Sabre A18. I have a feeling they will all do well with Concero, but you're right - some (like your Bryston or my Consonance) are a ridiculous mismatch in terms of size.

(1) Based on Lavorgna's description of how the iFi Micro USB power supply improved the performance of the Dragonfly, I'm probably going to grab one and try it with the Concero. No downside that I can see.

(2) As you might have guessed, the Concero is ruthlessly revealing of bad recordings. On the first two tracks of Craig Taborn's solo piano album "Avenging Angel" (96/24 FLAC download from HDTracks, transcoded to AIFF using Max), there are some really weird artifacts. I can't tell for certain whether there is some sort of "prepared piano" thing going on (a piece of paper on the soundboard, maybe?), or whether the piano was miked so close and so hot that you're actually hearing the vibration of the hammers. Whatever it is, the Concero doesn't hide it, not even a little bit. If you have a lot of 128k and 192k mp3 files, the Concero may not be for you, unless you're willing to spend to upgrade your music library.

(1) Based on Lavorgna's description of how the iFi Micro USB power supply improved the performance of the Dragonfly, I'm probably going to grab one and try it with the Concero. No downside that I can see.

(2) As you might have guessed, the Concero is ruthlessly revealing of bad recordings. On the first two tracks of Craig Taborn's solo piano album "Avenging Angel" (96/24 FLAC download from HDTracks, transcoded to AIFF using Max), there are some really weird artifacts. I can't tell for certain whether there is some sort of "prepared piano" thing going on (a piece of paper on the soundboard, maybe?), or whether the piano was miked so close and so hot that you're actually hearing the vibration of the hammers. Whatever it is, the Concero doesn't hide it, not even a little bit. If you have a lot of 128k and 192k mp3 files, the Concero may not be for you, unless you're willing to spend to upgrade your music library.

1) Not a bad idea. I notice a difference (or at least, I've convinced myself that I do) when feeding the Concero a squeaky-clean signal from my Auraliti PK90. It's powered by a NuForce LPS-1 linear PSU, and uses the SOtM tX-USB for output. Signal passes through an Auric USB from Charleston Cable Company for good measure. Not that the Concero sounds bad per se when I use a basic laptop connection... but there's a noticeable difference. I imagine the iFi device would be a similar transformation.

2) I'm hearing it the same way - exceptional for the hi-res or just hi-quality recordings in my collection, not so great for bands like Radar Bros, Pedro the Lion, or even Project 86 - which are great musically but somewhat challenged in terms of quality. I greatly prefer my Yulong Sabre D18 for those types of albums.

It looks like the apodizing filter is pretty close to the linear phase apodizing filter used in WM8741 DACs. The IIR filter is quite different.

Thanks, I was about to ask them for more info but now I won't have to.

I'm finding that I like IIR more often than the apodizing filter, though both have their place. The differences are small but if you have a good chain and really focus you can usually tell them apart, and appreciate one over the other.

Thanks, I was about to ask them for more info but now I won't have to.

I'm finding that I like IIR more often than the apodizing filter, though both have their place. The differences are small but if you have a good chain and really focus you can usually tell them apart, and appreciate one over the other.

My experience with the IIR vs apodizing filter is similar to yours and having carefully listened to all 7 filters on my Invicta, my preference for most recordings is the IIR filter. For me, the IIR seems to open up the soundstage a bit more, increasing width and depth with maybe a bit more "air" around individual performers -- as you pointed out the differences between the IIR and apodizing filters are fairly subtle but clearly apparent on close listening. Not that the apodizing filter isn't good as well -- it excels better than the IIR (perhaps) in removing the shrill "edge" from some digital recordings but does seem to slightly compress and flatten the soundstage just a bit. Considering that soundstaging is often a shortcoming of most headphones, I can see why some HP users might lean toward the IIR filter. I think Resonessence wisely chose to include what I consider their two best filters in the Concero.